United Kingdom: Dr Suzanne O’Sullivan (BPS neurologist)

Lou B Lou said:
Sorry - I don't know how to find the Archive link to articles -

https://www.thetimes.com/article/66389e62-e5a2-4959-8e7a-c0c3339f129a



Most Comments under this article agree with The Storyteller Suzanne O'Sullivan.


This Comment doesn't agree with her:

"Another plug for this dreadful person? From the paper which at least tried to address the Maeve O’Neill story with compassion and sensible judgement? Why on earth are you so keen on an implausible controversialist who has written her third book of psychosomaticising nonsense? Is it because of some vague editorial feeling that any medical condition not described by, say, Galen must be woke and snowflakey?"

.
Click to expand...

Not only do they agree but many absolutely agree with her and with each other. They must all consider that they have appreciation of matters sufficient to absolutely endorse her, otherwise how would they know just how perfect the book is? Deluded. Fancy a critique on Amazon? Don't read the book, don't criticise it. Just critique any endorsements telling you how great it is, all you need to know etc. endorsing not only the book but their own pre-existing opinions which the book endorse in turn.
 
Last edited:
Trish said:
I vaguely remember she did a chapter in a previous book about ME/CFS based on her psychosomatic view of one patient.
Or maybe that was just a bad dream. I can't be bothered finding out.
Click to expand...
I think she later admitted that the one patient she mentioned didn't actually exist and was just an amalgam of ME/CFS patients she had seen. Which was very dishonest of her.
 
rvallee said:
Oh, no, no no no. It goes both ways, as they love to say, but only in one direction. You see, it's the preferred direction, and therefore it's the correct one.

Although when you think of the absurd implications of her claims, and they are popular ones, not just hers, that up to 1/3 of chronic health problems are psychosomatic, and medicine has been growing into a fanatical obsession over this for the last few decades, how they hell is that supposed to be a success story?

And of course it isn't. The more they corrupt this with their ideology, the worse things will get, and in response the more they will point out how significant it is, how only they have the solution to this problem. A solution that clearly can't work given growing prevalence, but that's just something people should worry their pretty little heads with.

To me this is exactly like some ideologues who prefer to blame lack of faith for natural disasters, which conveniently happen to be getting worse over the last few decades. Because it is exactly the same thing for all intents and purposes.
Click to expand...

Often MUPS are simply labelled as psychosomatic because currently medicine cannot explain them imo.
 
rvallee said:
Oh wow the chickens are coming home to roost here, aren't they?

Having spent decades artificially inflating mental illnesses on the basis of psychosomatic ideology, even turning most mental health resources to this fake problem, giving the false impression of a massive crisis of mental health, largely on the belief that too many people are being unnecessarily diagnosed with medical illnesses, now there are too many mental health diagnoses, which they did on purpose, and it's framed exactly the same way as the model that created the inflated diagnoses in the first place: they're just worried well, or whatever.

The incoherence of this ideology is such that, by comparison, the ghosts of murdered aliens sounds almost the same. The real issue here is a crisis of people being guided by delusional fantasies, usually for personal profit, and the problem appears to be just as bad in the conspiracy fantasy crowds as in the freaking health care industry. It has distinctions, but no meaningful differences.
Click to expand...
rvallee said:
Oh wow the chickens are coming home to roost here, aren't they?

Having spent decades artificially inflating mental illnesses on the basis of psychosomatic ideology, even turning most mental health resources to this fake problem, giving the false impression of a massive crisis of mental health, largely on the belief that too many people are being unnecessarily diagnosed with medical illnesses, now there are too many mental health diagnoses, which they did on purpose, and it's framed exactly the same way as the model that created the inflated diagnoses in the first place: they're just worried well, or whatever.

The incoherence of this ideology is such that, by comparison, the ghosts of murdered aliens sounds almost the same. The real issue here is a crisis of people being guided by delusional fantasies, usually for personal profit, and the problem appears to be just as bad in the conspiracy fantasy crowds as in the freaking health care industry. It has distinctions, but no meaningful differences.
Click to expand...

But if they now take a scythe to an overgrown beanstalk of mental illness and sneak in ME, Chronic Lyme etc, they can take a scythe to that too! Two birds one stone. Still dangerous adversaries.
 
O'Sullivan said:
So you have both a psychiatric decline and you have a physical decline.
Click to expand...

Utsikt said:
I guess she didn’t get the note about how the psychosomatic medicine is the recent and final paradigm shift away from mind body dualism.
Click to expand...

rvallee said:
Not a dualist, though. Damn those dualists, always separating mental and physical and whatnot.
Click to expand...

Ooh and "Psychological disorders are just as real as physical disorders you guys." Good news though, as in Psychology Today apparently it's really real. "Long-Term COVID-19 Is Real"

Psychology Today said:
The clinical community first met the long-term COVID-19 (LTC) cluster of symptoms with skepticism. The patients were told or made to believe it was “in their head.” There has been little research on long-term COVID-19 and no actual treatment solutions for a long time. However, this is changing, and we are getting more research on that subject.
Click to expand...
 
SNT Gatchaman said:
Ooh and "Psychological disorders are just as real as physical disorders you guys." Good news though, as in Psychology Today apparently it's really real. "Long-Term COVID-19 Is Real"
Click to expand...
Yes, see, there is real, then there is "real", there is also Real, and of course real (winky face), but also Real (serious pouty face). Then of course we can't forget about really real, Real for real, and then there's rEaL. All of which is real. But now this is Really real real for real.

I do love those reveals. There are so many. "We used to tell those people their symptoms are real, but it turns out they may be Really real for real, but don't let anyone suggest that 'real' psychological symptoms are any less rEaL, which they aren't, well, they are, just in a different sense, where we are careful not to separate the mind and the body, which separately influence each another, but are also one and the same, whatever is more convenient at any moment, not a dualist, you're the dualist".

And let's be real, well, Real, here, all of this continues for the same reason as most absurd belief systems: those beliefs are too absurd, too mediocre, to admit to having been fooled. The exact same problem exists in the conspiracy fantasy communities, where showing people they are wrong only makes them dig further in, precisely because it's as gullible as falling for the wallet inspector. Again.
 
"Psychological disorders are just as real as physical disorders you guys."

Good thing nobody is arguing otherwise, and never have. The argument has always been about misdiagnosing, and hence mistreating, conditions as psychogenic when they are in fact biogenic.

But apparently that is too subtle or inconvenient an argument for some, despite many historical examples of psychs and medicine making exactly that mistake, with the all too predictable appalling consequences for patients.
 
Metastasising via the NZ Listener, published today: The Age of Diagnosis: Have we got it wrong on long Covid, depression and ADHD? [Archive]

Our need to define what ails us may do more harm than good but is fuelling the medical industry, a prominent neurologist claims. It sounds like it’s going to be 300 pages of medical tough love, telling readers to harden up and stop grizzling. It’s actually a counterintuitive, common-sense book full of useful and easy-to-apply advice. The Age of Diagnosis, by Suzanne O’Sullivan, looks at overdiagnosis, self-diagnosis and other aspects of what we might call the diagnosis epidemic
Click to expand...

It questions such widely held beliefs as the existence of long Covid, the role of serotonin in treating depression, the increase in ADHD and autism, and even the value of regular medical tests where there are no symptoms. O’Sullivan is an Irish neurologist based in London who specialises mainly in the treatment of epilepsy and psychosomatic disorders.
Click to expand...

One of her key points is that psychosomatic disorders – where patients experience physical symptoms for psychological reasons such as stress rather than medical conditions – are real. […] A lot of people could be helped if we acknowledged psychosomatic disorders are both common and serious.”This attitude has hampered the way in which long Covid, for instance, has been approached (see “Building a myth”).“[The media] presented long Covid as an unequivocal pathological result of a viral infection. [A psychosomatic] cause wasn’t even touched on.
Click to expand...

That, at least, is changing. “This is an area of research now. There are loads of people working on this, and there are clinics for this, but I’m still concerned that it’s not working. Psychosomatic disorders are being given new names, like ‘functional disorders’. But some day, someone will say, ‘Oh, functional, that just means the same as psychosomatic.’ What we need to do is convince the general public that this is one of the commonest medical disorders. It is there, it’s unconsciously generated and, for some people, it is more serious than any disease.
Click to expand...
 
Got to admire this part for astonishing lack of self-awareness.

We’ve also got a society that wants everything explained. If a medical theory comes forward that will provide answers, doctors will give it, because that’s a great consultation. So, I think the psychology of society and a fear of underdiagnosis drives it, and at the other end there’s a bunch of people waiting to profit from it.”
Click to expand...
 
This is literally as delusional as insisting that the sky is gone, pointing at the blue expanse of the sky screaming: "see? see! it's gone! the sky used to be right there and the whole thing is gone!".
This attitude has hampered the way in which long Covid, for instance, has been approached (see “Building a myth”).“ [The media] presented long Covid as an unequivocal pathological result of a viral infection. [A psychosomatic] cause wasn’t even touched on.
Click to expand...
The fact that Long Covid was initially, predictably, dismissed as variously psychosomatic or not existing, a fact that still largely remains true, is exactly as clownish as people believing that the basement of a pizzeria is used by global (by which they mean Jewish) elites to run a pedophile ring, even though the pizzeria literally doesn't have a basement.

The specifics of the delusion are different, but both are delusional fantasies with zero connection to reality and even less interest in adhering to facts or making sense. Not making sense is literally the point in conspiracy fantasies, and the arguments she makes neatly fall within the usual script. And they are always, ALWAYS, the underdog, sabotaged from within by the Deep State, even when they have total control of everything. Half of all health care budgets could be dedicated to psychosomatic clinics and they'd still complain about not getting a fair attempt to prove themselves.
Psychosomatic disorders are being given new names, like ‘functional disorders’. But some day, someone will say, ‘Oh, functional, that just means the same as psychosomatic.’ What we need to do is convince the general public that this is one of the commonest medical disorders.
Click to expand...
This is a marketing plan. You do not need to market the existence of things that work. They just work. It's the fact that they don't work that they have to sell the whole thing. You will likely have to convince a few people about things that don't work, and here they reveal that they understand that the whole thing is a cheap house of cards, but that they still want to sell it because it makes them feel special, as if they have special knowledge about secret things that no one else understands.

Although I will say that I really like that she is putting out the message about how 'functional' means psychosomatic. Which reveals that the profession has a very loose connection to ethics and legal responsibilities to tell the truth. About the only basis of disagreement has always been how to market the thing, never its substance, or concerns with the fact that it's a total fantasy that has destroyed millions of lives.
 
“[The media] presented long Covid as an unequivocal pathological result of a viral infection. [A psychosomatic] cause wasn’t even touched on."

This obvious untruth alone ought to get her laughed out of any serious discussion. But instead she does the rounds of podcasts and promotional interviews, because facts are just optional extras.
 
rvallee said:
This is literally as delusional as insisting that the sky is gone, pointing at the blue expanse of the sky screaming: "see? see! it's gone! the sky used to be right there and the whole thing is gone!".

The fact that Long Covid was initially, predictably, dismissed as variously psychosomatic or not existing, a fact that still largely remains true, is exactly as clownish as people believing that the basement of a pizzeria is used by global (by which they mean Jewish) elites to run a pedophile ring, even though the pizzeria literally doesn't have a basement.

The specifics of the delusion are different, but both are delusional fantasies with zero connection to reality and even less interest in adhering to facts or making sense. Not making sense is literally the point in conspiracy fantasies, and the arguments she makes neatly fall within the usual script. And they are always, ALWAYS, the underdog, sabotaged from within by the Deep State, even when they have total control of everything. Half of all health care budgets could be dedicated to psychosomatic clinics and they'd still complain about not getting a fair attempt to prove themselves.

This is a marketing plan. You do not need to market the existence of things that work. They just work. It's the fact that they don't work that they have to sell the whole thing. You will likely have to convince a few people about things that don't work, and here they reveal that they understand that the whole thing is a cheap house of cards, but that they still want to sell it because it makes them feel special, as if they have special knowledge about secret things that no one else understands.

Although I will say that I really like that she is putting out the message about how 'functional' means psychosomatic. Which reveals that the profession has a very loose connection to ethics and legal responsibilities to tell the truth. About the only basis of disagreement has always been how to market the thing, never its substance, or concerns with the fact that it's a total fantasy that has destroyed millions of lives.
Click to expand...
It’s basically making sure you dress up in clothes that aren’t too expensive/seem Everyman enough and driving a normal car when you are ‘on the job’ then thinking you are kidding /distracting everyone (whilst you get paid for your appearance) for inferring the other side is wrong and are just money-making so they don’t look at you because you wouldn’t be calling out of it were the other way round etc

what I couldn’t fully get is whether this neurologist (or ex - does she still work? What’s the term for it if not?) who is now an author of pop-books on how everything is psychosomatic

is saying that the ‘doing it for the money’ are the ones diagnosing the psychosomatic or the ones who aren’t and are checking there isn’t a treatable medical issue - because there have been a few of these where literal reading of the words it says the former when knowing her I assume the latter, but her spiel now seems to be warping to ‘no diagnoses of any kind, even if it’s a label that keeps them out of the system like functional , it’s all just to make money and no one has anything’ type feel to it

it’s like she is getting direction from other people and minds are being changed quickly or wires are getting crossed. But she’s clearly had a heavy circuit of these recently so I guess you get exhausted by the umpteenth interview

Or maybe that could be that these are in different countries that the messages are different- I haven’t analysed/cross-checked ?
 
Last edited:
rvallee said:
This is literally as delusional as insisting that the sky is gone, pointing at the blue expanse of the sky screaming: "see? see! it's gone! the sky used to be right there and the whole thing is gone!".

The fact that Long Covid was initially, predictably, dismissed as variously psychosomatic or not existing, a fact that still largely remains true, is exactly as clownish as people believing that the basement of a pizzeria is used by global (by which they mean Jewish) elites to run a pedophile ring, even though the pizzeria literally doesn't have a basement.

The specifics of the delusion are different, but both are delusional fantasies with zero connection to reality and even less interest in adhering to facts or making sense. Not making sense is literally the point in conspiracy fantasies, and the arguments she makes neatly fall within the usual script. And they are always, ALWAYS, the underdog, sabotaged from within by the Deep State, even when they have total control of everything. Half of all health care budgets could be dedicated to psychosomatic clinics and they'd still complain about not getting a fair attempt to prove themselves.

This is a marketing plan. You do not need to market the existence of things that work. They just work. It's the fact that they don't work that they have to sell the whole thing. You will likely have to convince a few people about things that don't work, and here they reveal that they understand that the whole thing is a cheap house of cards, but that they still want to sell it because it makes them feel special, as if they have special knowledge about secret things that no one else understands.

Although I will say that I really like that she is putting out the message about how 'functional' means psychosomatic. Which reveals that the profession has a very loose connection to ethics and legal responsibilities to tell the truth. About the only basis of disagreement has always been how to market the thing, never its substance, or concerns with the fact that it's a total fantasy that has destroyed millions of lives.
Click to expand...
Marketing yes.

But marketing is about finding a problem for which your solution fits the target consumer better than others on offer

so of course step 1. Is her telling a bunch of people what their problem is so they’ll ‘buy’ her solution

except her book doesn’t solve anything , and I’m not about to read the gaping fiction of it so I’m not sure the intention is to even pretend to help more a manifesto of we are not intended to survive ? Darwinism? Or tough love ism? Or just poor us for having to put up with all this ism?

I’m trying to think back to her first fiction book I also didn’t read but she also spent a lot of time getting herself in the papers etc for

and can’t remember whether that was just ‘human zoo’ like a modern version of the bearded lady circus thing in that film with the big song or had any ‘solution’ or ‘good outcome’ for the subjects, some of whom even if fictionalised clearly had a grim situation

it’s a bit of a new angle for medicine to do a book on not really fixing people just here’s the ones we triaged out gossip if so

and yes on the marketing front if it is the case it’s cases not to be dealt with , and we have fictionalised/made up or supposedly analgamated (as are tropes) ‘persona’ profiles

then what she would actually be marketing certainly falls into the unsavoury and to me tilts into the housewife friendly niceified propaganda type box
 
Deanne NZ said:
Link to RNZ interview.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/prog...e-o-sullivan-on-the-dangers-of-over-diagnosis
Kathryn Ryan the interviewer has a reputation of being sympathetic to MECFS & LC.
She challenged O’Sullivan towards the end. Kathryn ended the interview with a long “Hmmmm!” Which i translated as “I am not buying what you are selling Dr O’Sullivan”
Click to expand...
I skipped to the end, and it really showcases how little thought that goes into giving a psychosomatic explanation of anything.

Ryan starts this bit by giving an example of a case she knows where a patient presented with symptoms that looked very much like a brain injury, and was successfully treated by doing what you would do with someone that had had a serious concussion.

O’Sullivan (my bolding):
I perhaps don’t think you understand what psychosomatic symptoms are. I see people that have any type of symptoms. I have convulsive seizures and paralysis and blindness and every type of symptoms can be psychosomatic. A concussion, by the way, produces some of the commonest psychosomatic symptoms there are such as feeling dizzy or lightheaded and things like that. So I don’t really see that your argument in any way… That entirely… Everything you’ve described is still consistent with psychosomatic.​

Ryan:
Hmmm…
​
Edit: I’m not sure if the patient was an LC patient or not. It doesn’t matter for the point.
 
Regarding the post above, it seems to me like O’Sullivan is possibly arguing that the psychosomatic model claims that any symptom can be psychosomatic, and consequently, the fact that a patient presents with symptoms indicates that it’s psychosomatic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom